KAASHIF MAKBUL DOCTOR vs DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT Advocate - S V THAKKAR — 588/2026
Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 24th March 2026.
CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS
CNR: GJAH010013192026
Filing Number
588/2026
Filing Date
25-02-2026
Registration No
588/2026
Registration Date
25-02-2026
Court
Ahmedabad District
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
Decision Date
24th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
KAASHIF MAKBUL DOCTOR
Adv. C K PANDYA
Respondent(s)
DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT Advocate - S V THAKKAR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
Disposed
ORDER
ORDER
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 24-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 20-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 16-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 13-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 09-03-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: 588/2026 - Kaashif Makbul Doctor v. Directorate of Enforcement The court rejected bail for Kaashif Makbul Doctor in a money laundering case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The applicant was arrested in connection with a cyber fraud conspiracy generating approximately ₹101 crores in proceeds of crime, which were laundered through bank accounts and cryptocurrency. Although the applicant challenged the legality of his arrest and claimed insufficient evidence against him personally, the court found prima-facie evidence of his involvement in layering criminal proceeds through third-party bank accounts and cryptocurrency transactions, as corroborated by witness statements. The court determined the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA were not satisfied, justifying continued detention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 588/2026 - Kaashif Makbul Doctor v. Directorate of Enforcement The court rejected bail for Kaashif Makbul Doctor in a money laundering case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The applicant was arrested in connection with a cyber fraud conspiracy generating approximately ₹101 crores in proceeds of crime, which were laundered through bank accounts and cryptocurrency. Although the applicant challenged the legality of his arrest and claimed insufficient evidence against him personally, the court found prima-facie evidence of his involvement in layering criminal proceeds through third-party bank accounts and cryptocurrency transactions, as corroborated by witness statements. The court determined the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA were not satisfied, justifying continued detention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts